[core] Is this a typo in -08

[Jim Schaad]

In section 6 the following text occurs:

In descriptive usage, a BERT Option is interpreted in the same way as
the equivalent Option with SZX == 6, except that the payload is also
allowed to contain a multiple of 1024 bytes (non-final BERT block) or
more than 1024 bytes (final BERT block).

However I think that the last sentence should read "less than 1024 bytes".

Jim

[Christian Amsüss]

Post by Jim Schaad
In descriptive usage, a BERT Option is interpreted in the same way as
the equivalent Option with SZX == 6, except that the payload is also
allowed to contain a multiple of 1024 bytes (non-final BERT block) or
more than 1024 bytes (final BERT block).
However I think that the last sentence should read "less than 1024 bytes".

Sounds right to me: It extends what is already permitted for SZX=6, and
<=1024 is already allowed for final SZX=6 blocks. (In effect, the last
BERT block can have any length, only limited by Max-Message-Size).

Best regards
Christian

[Carsten Bormann]

Post by Christian Amsüss

Post by Jim Schaad
In descriptive usage, a BERT Option is interpreted in the same way as
the equivalent Option with SZX == 6, except that the payload is also
allowed to contain a multiple of 1024 bytes (non-final BERT block) or
more than 1024 bytes (final BERT block).
However I think that the last sentence should read "less than 1024 bytes".

Sounds right to me: It extends what is already permitted for SZX=6, and
<=1024 is already allowed for final SZX=6 blocks. (In effect, the last
BERT block can have any length, only limited by Max-Message-Size).

Yes.

This seems to be the second time that someone stumbles about that wording; maybe we can find a better way to say this.

Grüße, Carsten

[Jim Schaad]

-----Original Message-----
From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:***@tzi.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 2:11 AM
To: Christian Amsüss <***@energyharvesting.at>
Cc: Jim Schaad <***@augustcellars.com>; draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-***@ietf.org; core <***@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [core] Is this a typo in -08

Post by Christian Amsüss

Post by Jim Schaad
In descriptive usage, a BERT Option is interpreted in the same way as
the equivalent Option with SZX == 6, except that the payload is also
allowed to contain a multiple of 1024 bytes (non-final BERT block) or
more than 1024 bytes (final BERT block).
However I think that the last sentence should read "less than 1024 bytes".

Sounds right to me: It extends what is already permitted for SZX=6, and
<=1024 is already allowed for final SZX=6 blocks. (In effect, the last
BERT block can have any length, only limited by Max-Message-Size).

Yes.

This seems to be the second time that someone stumbles about that wording; maybe we can find a better way to say this.

[JLS] I think I now understand what this text is supposed to be saying.

"except that the payload is also allowed to contain multiple blocks. For non-final BERT blocks, the payload is always a multiple of 1024 bytes.
For final BERT blocks, the payload is a multiple (possibly 0) of 1024 bytes plus a partial block of less than 1024 bytes."

Jim


Grüße, Carsten

[Brian Raymor]

Tracking in https://github.com/core-wg/coap-tcp-tls/issues/143 for coap-tcp-tls-09.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Schaad [mailto:***@augustcellars.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 4:41 AM
To: 'Carsten Bormann' <***@tzi.org>; 'Christian Amsüss' <***@energyharvesting.at>
Cc: draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-***@ietf.org; 'core' <***@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [core] Is this a typo in -08



-----Original Message-----
From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:***@tzi.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 2:11 AM
To: Christian Amsüss <***@energyharvesting.at>
Cc: Jim Schaad <***@augustcellars.com>; draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-***@ietf.org; core <***@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [core] Is this a typo in -08

Post by Christian Amsüss

Post by Jim Schaad
In descriptive usage, a BERT Option is interpreted in the same way as
the equivalent Option with SZX == 6, except that the payload is also
allowed to contain a multiple of 1024 bytes (non-final BERT block) or
more than 1024 bytes (final BERT block).
However I think that the last sentence should read "less than 1024 bytes".

Sounds right to me: It extends what is already permitted for SZX=6, and
<=1024 is already allowed for final SZX=6 blocks. (In effect, the last
BERT block can have any length, only limited by Max-Message-Size).

Yes.

This seems to be the second time that someone stumbles about that wording; maybe we can find a better way to say this.

[JLS] I think I now understand what this text is supposed to be saying.

"except that the payload is also allowed to contain multiple blocks. For non-final BERT blocks, the payload is always a multiple of 1024 bytes.
For final BERT blocks, the payload is a multiple (possibly 0) of 1024 bytes plus a partial block of less than 1024 bytes."

Jim


Grüße, Carsten

['Christian Amsüss']

where in RC 7959 does it say this?

To be honest, I don't find it explicitly either; 7959 2.3 only says "The
block size implied by SZX MUST match the size of the payload in bytes,
if the M bit is set." -- I'd be a bit strange to send a final payload
longer then the block size, but maybe it's even allowed?

Christian